January 22, 1976
Page 697
THE MUSKIE COUNTERMESSAGE
HON. JOHN B. ANDERSON OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 22, 1976
Mr. ANDERSON of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, since I have already publicly commented on President Ford's state of the Union message, I think in the interest of fairness I should give equal time to Senator MUSKIE's countermessage of last evening. The Democratic spokesman opened by observing that the state of the Union is not what the President or the Democrats say it is, but rather the condition in which we find ourselves. After criticizing the administration for not doing enough to stimulate economic recovery and put people back to work, the Senator concluded by proclaiming that the state of the Union is "very strong indeed."
After correctly pinpointing public dissatisfaction with Government spending and programs, the Senator proposed that the answer was more Government spending and programs to solve all our Nation's problems. While the Democrats have faulted the President's message for being short on specifics and new programs, the Democrats have countered with promises of all manner of new programs, but curiously lacking in specifics. Despite the Senator's concession that increased Federal spending for such programs could further fuel inflation, he failed to indicate the costs of the Democratic proposals and whether they just might prove to be inflationary. Instead he Senator suggested that we have nothing to fear so long as we have a congressional budget process to keep track of the mounting costs and label the sum total a spending ceiling. Moreover, our fears of excessive Government spending could be allayed if only we ran the Government in a more businesslike manner. Never mind that our experience with Government efficiency might suggest that some things could better be done by State and local governments or the private sector. The Senator unfairly criticized the President for not mentioning the need for greater Government efficiency in his state of the Union address, even though the central thrust of the President's domestic program reforms would have precisely that effect.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, it struck me that the Democratic spokesman was speaking out of both sides of his mouth while biting his tongue in the hope that nobody would catch the glaring contradictions. Put another way, in attempting to span both the Wallace and McGOVERN wings of the Democratic Party, the message executed a perfect spreadeagle and fell flat on its beak. To the Democrats, the new realism seems to mean to continue to promise the people everything but to claim it can be done for less cost. The American people are smart enough to know that the just deserts of this kind of political pie in the sky is inflationary indigestion.